Comparisons and Intersectionality Between Artegenic and Psychological Approaches

Recommended APA 7th Edition Citation:

Grinev, L. (2024, September 7). Comparisons and Intersectionality between artegenic and psychological approaches. In Articles. WellnessToday180. https://wellnesstoday180.net/blog#articles

In the United States (U.S.), there has been a historical distinction and separation between church and state (Green, 2023). Such bimodality has influenced cultural, legal, and political perspectives in approaches and principles (Green, 2024). Moreover, philosophical foundations supporting research are strictly rooted in empiricism (Kareem, 2023). In other words, biblical constructs and themes are generally not seen in empirical sources since faith is perceived as dogmatic (Sudduth, 2009).

First, knowledge sources influencing interpretations and results yielded in the field of psychology and Christianity will be discussed. Differences and similarities between the field of psychology and Christianity will be established. Intersectionality between the field of psychology and Christianity can then be proposed. Lastly, tensions that has and will continue to cause the separation between the field of psychology and Christianity will be unveiled.

Epistemology

Inquiring on sources of knowledge requires an investigation in the scope of epistemology (Sol & Heng, 2022). Epistemology also allows probing of relevant constructs and facts (Sol & Heng, 2022). As a result, differences between constructs and facts can be drawn (Sol & Heng, 2022). Hence, rationalism is indictive in epistemological pursuits (Sol & Heng, 2022).

Psychology

Fields of study rooted in empiricism, like psychology, often use secular approaches to inform evidence-based practices (EBPs; Vroom & Massey, 2022). Conceptual and experimental designs or trials are noted to inform secular procedures and processes within EBPs (Vroom & Massey, 2022). Nevertheless, EBPs rely on capacities, development, practice, research and theory to improve desired outcomes (Levin & Hanson, 2020). Moreover, all secular approaches depend on the applicability, reliability, and validity of findings and interpretations of formal and testable hypotheses, propositions, or theory (Fellows & Liu, 2020).

Christianity

Aretegenic approaches are used by individuals employing a theistic worldview (John, 2010). For Christians, theistic worldviews are informed from biblical renderings, such as those seen in the King James Bible (1769/2008). Biblical interpretations have been used by theoretical philosophers, such as Kierkegaard, to promote holistic health- and wellbeing-related practices (Johnson, 2010). Therefore, research endeavors, thus findings or progressions, in a biblical scope are often supported by the biblical prompts, like Proverbs 2:6-8, stating that all common sense, understanding, and understanding comes from the Lord, or John 16:13-15, informing that the Holy Spirit will guide people into all truth, from the King James Bible to glorify God and His Work following His Creation.

Comparison/Intersectionality

One the one hand, psychologists use secular approaches. On the other hand, Christians, or biblical-based philosophers or researchers, utilize aretegenic approaches. Johnson (2010) presented that Christian principles are gear towards improving human and spiritual development and nature by reducing anxiety, despair, and sin. Melchart (2020) affirmed that secular approaches intend on understanding biopsychosocial interactions to inform behavior adjustment, change, and development much like other human conditions, mechanisms, and processes. Although different approaches are used in respective scopes, similar proliferating outcomes are desired.

Indeed, Melchart (2020) eluded that biology affects psychology and culture, and culture affects psychology and biology. Worldviews such as those stemming from faith are embedded in culture (Melchert, 2020). In other words, biblical and secular worldviews, much like approaches, are intermingled in daily occurrences, even in research. Acknowledgements of the intermingling of these approaches are enticing the calls for more collaborative approaches in application and research (Mancini, 2021).

The American Psychiatric Association (n.d.) has promoted cultural competency in psychological-based practices to have faith considered in practices concerning interpersonal interactions. Even more contemporary biblical worldviews, particularly the biblical counseling view, parallel Christian faith as a psychology and Christian counsel as a form of psychotherapy (Powlison, 2010). Pointing to 1 Corinthians 1:14 and 10:13 (King James Bible, 1769/2008), Powlison (2010) affirmed that even aretegenic approaches all requested to investigate deeper continuities and commonalities. Similarly, Powlison inferred from Proverbs 6:6 and 30:24-48 that biblical counsel must consider that reflections and revelations can stem from extrabiblical sources of wisdom. Ergo, despite differences, a shift to bridge the gap between aretegenic and secular approaches is rather underway or at least significantly proposed.

Rise of Tensions

            Thoroughly minimizing or eliminating the gap between aretegenic and secular approaches requires an analysis and understanding of why the separation between the field of psychology and Christianity occurred which inevitably caused tensions between the two worldviews. Empirical approaches began to rise significantly throughout the 16th and 17th centuries (van Wieringen, 2022). The influence, perhaps establishment, of empiricism in the U.S. can arguably be seen with the separation of church and state that was enshrined in the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause as part of the U.S. Constitution. Thus, the dichotomy between empirical and non-empirical thinking was born in U.S. interactions, structures, and systems (van Wieringen, 2022).

Kutschera (2006) pointed out that the 1950s solidified the separation between psychology and church with modern “atheistic” evolutionary theory being expansively accepted among populaces. Notable scientists in the 1950s pushed for religious dogma not to be alongside facts and experimental data (Kutschera, 2006). Johnson (2010) explained that well before the 1950s, Modernism arose to consist of three sectors, two of which concerned the exclusion of public religious discourse and reduction in religious belief and practice. As a result, modernism, a significant factor of empiricism, undermined faith-based traditions and revelations by indicating that human knowledge is within human consciousness, experience, and reason (Johnson, 2010), not divine sources. As a result, biblical considerations, prompts, and themes as not widely seen in empirical sources.

Since Christian-constructs were minimized, nonetheless the authority, nature, and power of God essentially omitted, from empirical literature and research, the church began to be in confliction with science (Johnson, 2010). Traditions between and within psychology and the church-based arenas also began to embody continuities of conflict (Johnson, 2010). The levels-of-explanation view released in 1971 even indicated sharp distinctions between disciplines of psychology and theology in which respective boundaries should not be fused (Johnson, 2010).

However, other models attempted to reintegrate biblical-constructs back into the realm of science, particularly with the integration view in 1973 calling for biblical-based psychology to consider naturalism and secular humanism (Johnson, 2010). Even more contemporary biblical-based worldviews, like Christian psychology and transformational psychology, have combined secular models of therapy and soul care (Johnson, 2010). Nevertheless, empiricism appears to only be concerned with cultural competence and does not appear to be profoundly incorporating biblical constructs in published works or research, withstanding.

Conclusion

Faith became stigmatized in empirical science (van Wieringen, 2022). No longer could phenomena, like miracles, be attributed to divine Creation or intervention (van Wieringen, 2022). Empiricism viewed faith as only belonging to the realm of emotions and feelings, and divine Creation or intervention broke the laws of nature (van Wieringen, 2022). Additionally, empiricism did not have measurements concerning faith or divine Creation or intervention, which lead to the demise of authenticity of biblical constructs in secular literature and research (van Wieringen, 2022). Thus, aretegenic and secular approaches became distinct.

Yet, theologian philosophers and researchers alike have attempted to draw parallels between the two arenas and reintegrate biblical constructs back into secular settings. Taylor (2019) provided examples of how biblical accounts and documents can be appropriately used in descriptive, historical, qualitative, and quasi-experimental research approaches. Furthermore, Taylor informed that researchers could use biblical sources as inquiry to lead to discovery, sourced as prior knowledge, inform decision-making, and guide practices. Likewise, van Wieringen (2022) indicated that biblical constructs could be referred to as genetivus subiectivus or genetivus obiectivus.

Altogether, theologian philosophers and researchers have made strides to prevent individual faiths conflicting with occupational or research endeavors by attempting to present appropriate intersectionality and terminology between aretegenic and secular worldviews. Still, empiricism has not acknowledged or reciprocated presented intersectionality abundantly beyond collaborative models concerning cultural competency. Regardless, what was the overwhelming conflict between the two arenas appear to be more tolerable amongst differing worldviews nowadays.

References

American Psychiatric Association. (n.d.). Learn about the collaborative care model. https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/professional-interests/integrated-care/learn 

Fellows, R., & Liu, A. M. M. (2020). Borrowing theories: Contextual and empirical considerations. Construction Management and Economics, 38(7), 581-588. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2020.1727541

Fowler, R. A., & Ford, N. (2021). Grace-based counseling: An effective new biblical model. Moody Publishers.

Green, S. K. (2023). Separating church and state: A history. Journal of Church and State, 65(1), 153-155. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcs/csac086 

Johnson, E. L. (Ed.). (2010). Psychology and Christianity: Five views (2nd ed.). InterVarsity Press.

Kareem, Z. (2023). What is empiricism? Critically evaluate its value when writing history. OTS Canadian Journal, 2(5), 12-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.58840/ots.v2i5.29 

King James Bible. (2008). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1769)

Kutschera, U. (2006). Dogma, not faith, is the barrier to scientific enquiry. Nature, 443(7107), 26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/443026b

Levin, B. L., & Hanson, A. (2020). Population-based behavioral health. In Foundations of Behavioral Health (pp. 1-13). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18435-3_1 

Mancini, M.A. (2021). Integrated behavioral health service models and core competencies. In Integrated Behavioral Health Practice (pp. 1-23). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59659-0_1 

Melchert, T. P. (2020). The foundation framework for understanding human psychology and behavioral health care. In Foundations of Health Service Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 3-19). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816426-6.00001-3 

Powlison, D. (2010). A biblical counseling view. In E. L. Johnson (Ed.), Psychology and Christianity: Five views (2nd ed., pp. 269-319). InterVarsity Press.

Sol, K., & Heng, K. (2022). Understanding epistemology and its key approaches in research. Cambodian Journal of Educational Research, 2(2), 80-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.62037/cjer.2022.02.02.05 

Sudduth, M. (2009). The contribution of religious experience to dogmatic theology. In Analytic Theology (pp. 214-232). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199203567.003.0011 

Taylor, J. W. (2019). A biblical perspective for research. The Journal of Adventist Education, 81(3). https://www.journalofadventisteducation.org/2019.81.3.2 

Van Wieringen, A. (2022). Dichotomy between religion and science from the perspective of Bible and Exegesis. Theological Reflections: Eastern European Journal of Theology, 20(1), 93-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.29357/2789-1577.2022.20.1.6

Vroom, E. B., & Massey, O. T. (2022). Moving from implementation science to implementation practice: The need to solve practical problems to improve behavioral health services. Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 49, 106-116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-021-09765-1